↓ Skip to main content

Peto’s Paradox: how has evolution solved the problem of cancer prevention?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
78 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor
video
3 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Peto’s Paradox: how has evolution solved the problem of cancer prevention?
Published in
BMC Biology, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12915-017-0401-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc Tollis, Amy M. Boddy, Carlo C. Maley

Abstract

The risk of developing cancer should theoretically increase with both the number of cells and the lifespan of an organism. However, gigantic animals do not get more cancer than humans, suggesting that super-human cancer suppression has evolved numerous times across the tree of life. This is the essence and promise of Peto's Paradox. We discuss what is known about Peto's Paradox and provide hints of what is yet to be discovered.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 16%
Other 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 23 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2021.
All research outputs
#301,774
of 16,623,170 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biology
#66
of 1,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,584
of 268,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,623,170 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them